Great post, even if you are going to catch Hell for it.
I have to agree, in General terms, and basically, it is one great-big New York City, although I hear that parts of Paris and London are about the same.
It ain't just China.
And isn't it ironic, how more education helps the Chinese rise above it, while in the west it tends to make the problem even worse in so many cases... ?

I would suggest that among the denizens of Paris and London that overcrowding is only one element in the explanation for increased social aggressiveness and other selfish/self-centred behaviour and is comparatively recent phenomena. The progressive loss of social cohesion and order has much to do also with the loss of racial/ethnic and cultural homogeniety and the ghettoisation of large Western cities which has created social and cultural division within these cities as well as making them more crowded and cramped.

The same sort of behaviour of the Chinese in China and Taiwan, overwhelmingly homogeneous countries, is no new social phenomenon. Speaking to North American missionaries and other Westerners who had lived in Chinese-speaking Asia since the 1950s and who could speak Chinese well, they told me that it had always been that way.

I suggested in the mid-1990s to a Canadian ex-pat friend that the reasons for the chronic and endemic rudeness, belligerence, and physical and social aggressiveness and other intensely selfish/self-centred behaviour of the Chinese was because that in the overcrowded, cramped conditions of high-density living in teeming Chinese cities that the Chinese were exhibiting certain of the same behaviours as the rats in the experiments of the "behavioral sink" conducted by John B. Calhoun. (See below.) There may be an element of truth in this, but I believe it runs deeper in the Chinese psyche than behaviours caused by just the overcrowded and cramped conditions in Chinese cities.

Chinese societies are dominance-submission societies where one is either dominant or submissive and this marked out by conduct shown by the Chinese to each other which is confrontational and challenging and which contests the position of the other: Chinese, for example, will not walk out of each other's way when walking down a narrow or crowded footpath as to do so is to show submissive behaviour and is a sign of surrender to another more dominant party. Such petty, childish behaviour is seen as an important contest of wills. This is also a demonstration of another aspect of the Chinese, their emotional immaturity and their childish naivety. Once more, I generalise, there are emotionally mature Chinese, but these form only a substantial minority in my experience and observation.

From Wiki:

Quote:

The ethologist John B. Calhoun coined the term "behavioral sink" to describe the collapse in behavior which resulted from overcrowding. Over a number of years, Calhoun conducted over-population experiments on Norway rats (in 1958–1962) and mice (in 1968–1972).[1] Calhoun coined the term "behavioral sink" in his February 1, 1962 report in an article titled Population Density and Social Pathology in the Scientific American weekly newspaper[2] on the rat experiment.[3] Calhoun's work became used as an animal model of societal collapse, and his study has become a touchstone of urban sociology and psychology in general.[4]

...
I suggested in the mid-1990s to a Canadian ex-pat friend that the reasons for the chronic and endemic rudeness, belligerence, and physical and social aggressiveness and other intensely selfish/self-centred behaviour of the Chinese was because that in the overcrowded, cramped conditions of high-density living in teeming Chinese cities that the Chinese were exhibiting certain of the same behaviours as the rats in the experiments of the "behavioral sink" conducted by John B. Calhoun. (See below.) There may be an element of truth in this, but I believe it runs deeper in the Chinese psyche than behaviours caused by just the overcrowded and cramped conditions in Chinese cities.

Yeah, I read that series of reports on Rats and Mice in a limited space where they could reproduce endlessly... once.
The implications are horrific, and inescapable.

We know why China lifted it's one-child policy, same reason why (publicly) the EU is trying to import mass numbers of 3rd-worlders ; because Socialism/Communism needs an expanding sources of revenue and/or laborers .... as Maggie said; "Sooner or later, you run out of other people's money."

And so the Population bomb is reloaded, upgraded and then ignored by the same people that used to warn us about it. And on and on it goes.

So, instead of sitting around bitching about it, maybe we should try to brain-storm a solution?
Not the cultural angle, but the Social/political engineering that perpetuates and makes it worse.

__________________
"Stupidity is always amazing, no matter how often one encounters it."

I would suggest that among the denizens of Paris and London that overcrowding is only one element in the explanation for increased social aggressiveness and other selfish/self-centred behaviour and is comparatively recent phenomena. The progressive loss of social cohesion and order has much to do also with the loss of racial/ethnic and cultural homogeniety and the ghettoisation of large Western cities which has created social and cultural division within these cities as well as making them more crowded and cramped.

The same sort of behaviour of the Chinese in China and Taiwan, overwhelmingly homogeneous countries, is no new social phenomenon. Speaking to North American missionaries and other Westerners who had lived in Chinese-speaking Asia since the 1950s and who could speak Chinese well, they told me that it had always been that way.

I suggested in the mid-1990s to a Canadian ex-pat friend that the reasons for the chronic and endemic rudeness, belligerence, and physical and social aggressiveness and other intensely selfish/self-centred behaviour of the Chinese was because that in the overcrowded, cramped conditions of high-density living in teeming Chinese cities that the Chinese were exhibiting certain of the same behaviours as the rats in the experiments of the "behavioral sink" conducted by John B. Calhoun. (See below.) There may be an element of truth in this, but I believe it runs deeper in the Chinese psyche than behaviours caused by just the overcrowded and cramped conditions in Chinese cities.

Chinese societies are dominance-submission societies where one is either dominant or submissive and this marked out by conduct shown by the Chinese to each other which is confrontational and challenging and which contests the position of the other: Chinese, for example, will not walk out of each other's way when walking down a narrow or crowded footpath as to do so is to show submissive behaviour and is a sign of surrender to another more dominant party. Such petty, childish behaviour is seen as an important contest of wills. This is also a demonstration of another aspect of the Chinese, their emotional immaturity and their childish naivety. Once more, I generalise, there are emotionally mature Chinese, but these form only a substantial minority in my experience and observation.

I would suggest that among the denizens of Paris and London that overcrowding is only one element in the explanation for increased social aggressiveness and other selfish/self-centred behaviour and is comparatively recent phenomena. The progressive loss of social cohesion and order has much to do also with the loss of racial/ethnic and cultural homogeniety and the ghettoisation of large Western cities which has created social and cultural division within these cities as well as making them more crowded and cramped.

The same sort of behaviour of the Chinese in China and Taiwan, overwhelmingly homogeneous countries, is no new social phenomenon. Speaking to North American missionaries and other Westerners who had lived in Chinese-speaking Asia since the 1950s and who could speak Chinese well, they told me that it had always been that way.

I suggested in the mid-1990s to a Canadian ex-pat friend that the reasons for the chronic and endemic rudeness, belligerence, and physical and social aggressiveness and other intensely selfish/self-centred behaviour of the Chinese was because that in the overcrowded, cramped conditions of high-density living in teeming Chinese cities that the Chinese were exhibiting certain of the same behaviours as the rats in the experiments of the "behavioral sink" conducted by John B. Calhoun. (See below.) There may be an element of truth in this, but I believe it runs deeper in the Chinese psyche than behaviours caused by just the overcrowded and cramped conditions in Chinese cities.

Chinese societies are dominance-submission societies where one is either dominant or submissive and this marked out by conduct shown by the Chinese to each other which is confrontational and challenging and which contests the position of the other: Chinese, for example, will not walk out of each other's way when walking down a narrow or crowded footpath as to do so is to show submissive behaviour and is a sign of surrender to another more dominant party. Such petty, childish behaviour is seen as an important contest of wills. This is also a demonstration of another aspect of the Chinese, their emotional immaturity and their childish naivety. Once more, I generalise, there are emotionally mature Chinese, but these form only a substantial minority in my experience and observation.

Back around 2003 I took a history class titled "The History of Modern China." The professor for that class was a former member of the Nixon administration by the name of Dennis Doolin. Doctor Doolin was a graduate the University of San Francisco, and Stanford University (M.A., Ph.D.). Veteran of the Korean War and taught at several institutions including Stanford University and the U.S. National War College. During his career in the U.S. government he served as Defense Dept. Senior China Analyst, as Deputy Asst. Secretary of Defense for East Asia, and as Deputy Undersecretary of the Air Force for International Affairs he also spoke Mandarin Chinese and Japanese fluently and could actually write in kanji. One of the most interesting things that I learned from Doctor Doolin was that the ancient name of China was not "Middle Kingdom" as is commonly believed but rather "Central Kingdom." According to Doctor Doolin the moniker stemmed from the Chinese belief that China is in the center of civilization and thusly, superior in rank and privilege to all other countries. The point is that, in my opinion, the behaviors that you describe extend to China's international relations.

__________________
Give me a fast ship and the wind at my back for I intend to sail in harms way! (John Paul Jones)

I cannot say I disagree with anything the good Mr redzen has said so far...

China has to change, or go under.

Trouble is, the aforementioned "squabbling among themselves" is an unfortunate and basic product of one simple and recognisable fact...

"The Chinese", as an ethnic group, are not, and have never been, homogenous.

From one end of that giant country to the other, ethnic differences have made "Chinese" people as different from one another as Russians are from Mongol people.

The early dynasty (Chin) in China pushed together different groups under the one label of Chinese, and have been fighting amongst themselves ever since. the present "country" that we know as China is still a hodgepodge of people whose basic style of living, eating, language, customs, and any other social issue you can name, have been mashed together under the one banner for WAY too long.

If China self-destructs, its either going to be bad news for Asia as a whole, or we might see something we have not seen since the early Chin Emperors, that is, "The Chinese" finally realising that their assumption that they are more alike than different was unfounded.

I for one, would definately like to see China finally complete it's transition from an Austro-Hungarian like psudo society, to a group of nations that ARE on the road to change in a significant way.

the other basic problem is this. Not everyone in China can be middle class, as the west has unfortunately given the impression that competitativeness can lead to prosperity for all.

and their just aren't enough resources in China for all to have a Western standard of living. This is the basic problem IMOH, in a nutshell.

Lots of people are going to have to be left behind for this next "Great Leap Forward"

Drusus

__________________
My Articles, ALMOST LIVE, exclusive to The Armchair!

Soviet Submarines in WW2....The Mythology of Shiloh....(Edited) Both Sides of the Warsaw GhettoGULAG Glossary....Who Really Killed The Red Baron?....Pearl Harbor At 75Lincoln-Douglas Debates

I am so discouraged by many of the recent posts about their judgement of Chinese People, that this maybe my last post here on ACG.

There are many shortfalls of Chinese that, while I cannot necessarily defend; and mostly are true. But for anyone who has not travel to the Eurasia Continent, to make judgement on their people, and perhaps support regime change; or ill will wish is a concern for me personally. The drum beat of American Exceptionalism and Nationalism is at presently on a collision course with Chinese Rise and also Nationalism.

I think I agree with former Australia PM, Kevin Rudd, who was also Australian Ambassador To China. "American has it all wrong about the Chinese" If Chinese Government is such terrible to their people, why do they have over 70% support of Chinese People? I believe that is much higher than American government? They have not necessarily created what the West would call Middle Class, but they have lifted much more people out of poverty than any current government. Also, Chinese are free to leave their country. They issue passport to anyone who wish to go.

For anyone who thinks Japanese are more polite, just ride in Tokyo Subway during rush hour traffic. Ask how ladies in Tokyo are afraid of perverts who take advantage of them. If they think Chinese are rude, well they have not dealt with Indian Businessmen or Arab traders. They also have not travelled to other Asian Countries.

The only thing I see is xenophobia. Chinese I guess are the Hillbillies as the Newest Member of Country Club of Super Powers, and many in the West do not like it.

If people think Trump will play hard ball against China, well; I just saw Chinese New Agencies in Hong Kong who said for US backing out of TPP is actually a blessing for struggling Chinese Economy. Since there won't be any agreement, Chinese won't be bound by any agreement as well. It's free for all, and play hardball as is. Chinese is used to that as usual.

Ironically, last month; Chinese Vice Premier Liu Yandong met with Angela Merkel who pledge to work together to keep EU door open for Chinese Goods. I believe 200 years ago, it was the opposite, Europeans, Americans; and Japanese wanted Chinese to open their market for trade. How time have changed. Only history in about another 100 years will tell, who are the real Jack Ass today.

Does America want to start the Second Opium War in China?

__________________
Nice is heavy on my mind.
I pray and wish the best for France.

As others have noted, the Chinese have a deep-seated inferiority complex, and there is a good reason for it: as a culture, they place image over substance.

__________________
Any man can hold his place when the bands play and women throw flowers; it is when the enemy presses close and metal shears through the ranks that one can acertain which are soldiers, and which are not.

I am so discouraged by many of the recent posts about their judgement of Chinese People, that this maybe my last post here on ACG.

It is natural to be judgemental of other people. Notice how many non-Americans are judging us. If you listen to our "enlightened" European friends, we are racist, Muslim hating, bible thumping, over weight, overly patriotic or nationalistic, obsessed with guns, etc, etc.

You need to defend your own beliefs, not run away from an argument. You must continue to do your part in bringing forth the Chinese POV and showing the other side of the coin.

I am so discouraged by many of the recent posts about their judgement of Chinese People, that this maybe my last post here on ACG.

There are many shortfalls of Chinese that, while I cannot necessarily defend; and mostly are true. But for anyone who has not travel to the Eurasia Continent, to make judgement on their people, and perhaps support regime change; or ill will wish is a concern for me personally. The drum beat of American Exceptionalism and Nationalism is at presently on a collision course with Chinese Rise and also Nationalism.

I think I agree with former Australia PM, Kevin Rudd, who was also Australian Ambassador To China. "American has it all wrong about the Chinese" If Chinese Government is such terrible to their people, why do they have over 70% support of Chinese People? I believe that is much higher than American government? They have not necessarily created what the West would call Middle Class, but they have lifted much more people out of poverty than any current government. Also, Chinese are free to leave their country. They issue passport to anyone who wish to go.

For anyone who thinks Japanese are more polite, just ride in Tokyo Subway during rush hour traffic. Ask how ladies in Tokyo are afraid of perverts who take advantage of them. If they think Chinese are rude, well they have not dealt with Indian Businessmen or Arab traders. They also have not travelled to other Asian Countries.

The only thing I see is xenophobia. Chinese I guess are the Hillbillies as the Newest Member of Country Club of Super Powers, and many in the West do not like it.

If people think Trump will play hard ball against China, well; I just saw Chinese New Agencies in Hong Kong who said for US backing out of TPP is actually a blessing for struggling Chinese Economy. Since there won't be any agreement, Chinese won't be bound by any agreement as well. It's free for all, and play hardball as is. Chinese is used to that as usual.

Ironically, last month; Chinese Vice Premier Liu Yandong met with Angela Merkel who pledge to work together to keep EU door open for Chinese Goods. I believe 200 years ago, it was the opposite, Europeans, Americans; and Japanese wanted Chinese to open their market for trade. How time have changed. Only history in about another 100 years will tell, who are the real Jack Ass today.

Does America want to start the Second Opium War in China?

Don't be discouraged. I hope you keep posting, too. There are several people here who I sometimes don't agree with, but I still like them. Not asking you to like them, though hahaha...

Don't be discouraged. I hope you keep posting, too. There are several people here who I sometimes don't agree with, but I still like them. Not asking you to like them, though hahaha...

more power to you, hope you don't give up.

His drama lasted two weeks.

__________________
Any man can hold his place when the bands play and women throw flowers; it is when the enemy presses close and metal shears through the ranks that one can acertain which are soldiers, and which are not.

While US Policy should not be dictated by China's wants, neither should we go out of the way to antagonize China either. The reality is, that what ever China thinks, Taiwan is really an independent country, and should be treated as such. It is shameful the way we treat Taiwan, simply because we are worried about upsetting the (mainland) Chinese. Taiwan was never under mainland China's rule, and it wasn't always part of China either. If the people of Taiwan don't wish to be part of China anymore, and have given up the fiction that they represent all of China, then it is time we treat them as the independent country they really are, and tell China to take a hike.

However, being one of things he did after being elected seems to be unnecessarily antagonizing the Chinese. It seems to me he could have talked to a lot of other countries leaders first, before the Taiwanese one, it seems a kind of in your face move, and there just isn't the need for such a provocative action. It is not Trump's action I question, merely the timing.

I know China regards Taiwan as part of China, but at one time, so was Vietnam - should we say it is ok to for the Chinese to take over Vietnam too, simply because at one time it ruled it? We already allowed them to take over Tibet, and did nothing about it. We do need to let China know that taking over Taiwan by force is not an option - if they want Taiwan to join with China, they need to convince the Taiwanese to do so voluntarily. Who knows, maybe the Taiwanese will decide that it is in their interest to join China, there could be economic benefits.